Re: IDLE in transaction introspection

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: IDLE in transaction introspection
Date: 2011-11-01 12:00:39
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYjqcdp_eNgWM3CfR7o1dMH-zjMt6MJQ-B++pS2VMCdyg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> If we are doing it, it might be useful to just call it "query", so
> that it is dead obvious to people that the definition changed..

Yeah. Otherwise, people who are parsing the hard-coded strings <idle>
and <idle in transaction> are likely to get confused.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-11-01 12:06:18 Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-11-01 11:46:55 Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf